There was some discussion [1] about an ITP I filed last year for a package
called email [2], which suffered from an inappropriate license and name
problems.
The upstream has since released a newer version under the GPL and has
indicated to me a willingness to have the package called eMail.
M
le, it might be easier to write a free
> > replacement in the time saved by messing around with non-free packages
> > and getting special Debian redistribution permissions.
>
> Yeah, and then you could use a less stupid name for it too.
>
> -Miles
--
Millis Miller <
What other package would you suggest that does the same functionality then
insteard? I specifically was interested in this one because of the mime
encoding of the signature/encryption functionality.
Millis
I've already spoken to the upstream author, and he does not see mwilling to
convert to a DFSG license. Probably the only thing I can do is to make it
suitable for the non-free section for the time being. Can you indicate to me
how the license shoudl be changed to be suitable for the non-free sec
OK, let me see if I can address all the comments I've received so far.
1. Description too long.
OK, I will change it to a shorter one, once I work out how to do that
with an ITP.
2. Various questions along the line of "What does email do that a
certain shell sequence doesn't".
This from Upstream
Package: wnpp
Version: N/A; reported 2003-06-27
Severity: wishlist
* Package name: email
Version : 1.9.0
Upstream Author : Dean Jones <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* URL : http://www.cleancode.org/email
* License : Custom
Description : Send email from command line,
6 matches
Mail list logo
